Utopia in Bollywood: 'Hum Aapke Hain Koun...!' Author(s): Rustom Bharucha Source: Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 30, No. 15 (Apr. 15, 1995), pp. 801-804 Published by: Economic and Political Weekly Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4402626 . Accessed: 14/01/2015 09:57

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Economic and Political Weekly is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Economic and Political Weekly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 140.233.70.45 on Wed, 14 Jan 2015 09:57:20 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PERSPECTIVES

appears to transcend. If this were so. Utopia in Bollywood entertainment could be reduced to an essentialised, a historical set of categories, 'Hum Aapke Ham Koun...!' conventions and formulae that could be perpetuatedthrough skill alone. But this is Rustom Bharucha not the case, since the worldof entertainment had different significances at different It is sad that we should be celebrating the centuryof cinema in India points in time. There are different kinds of with aI superhit so vacuious as 'Hum Aapke Hain Koun... ", a film devoid entertainment,different 'treatments'of the of any illusion worthyof thlecondition of the millions of people who are same rhetoric,different ways of envisioning utopia.These differneces. I would argue,are at once the primarnpatro7ns and victins of its vision. 77Tisis a film that not arbitrary,but intricately dependent on is obviously in lune withl the 'liberalisation'of our times, while being a range of strategies, guesses, and gambles, thoroughllygrounded in the signisof a homogenised, upper class, upper by which directors like Sooraj Barjatya caste Hindu constituency. appearto'give people whattheywant' while vetting the agenda for their desires and dreams. AT a time when the master narratives of entertainmentthat his narrativeannihilates In one of the most illuminatingreflections Hindi cinema are facing an inner collapse, whatever one has come to internalise and on 'Entertainmentand U topia',Richard Dyer or repeatingthemselves ad nausecmn,a new appreciateas 'variety' in entertainment.In has problematised this paradoxical terrain superhitseems to have brokenall box-offices the context of Hindi film blockbusters, this by which the world of entertainment recordsin thehistoiy of Bollywood. Defying would include melodrama, rousing responds to 'needs' that are 'real', while all norms of 'succes.s', it has attracted climaxes, shifts in perspective, histrionic "defining and delimiting what constitutes audiences throughoutthe country, cutting revelations,showdowns, suspense, subplots, the legitimate needs of people in society" acrossdifferences in class, caste,community, and a range of songs - not just 'happy' [Dyer 1993:272-831. Soon theone handthe gender,age, religion, andpolitical affiliation. party numbers which dominate Ram- avatarsof entertainmentcan posit 'utopian Whatmorecould one askfor in these divisive Laxman' s monochromatic, predictably solutions'('abundance'. 'energy', 'intensity', times?The perfect unifier, the entertainment rhythmic score. What makes Baratya's 'transparency',and 'community')in response foreveryIndian: 'Hum Aapke Hain Koun... ! ' intervention in popular cinema significant to the very real tensions of everyday life What is the secret of Sooraj Barjatya's is the ruthlessnesswith which he reducesthe ('scarcity'. 'exhaustion', 'dreariness', phenomenalsuccess? Does his film introduce levels in the narrative, providing us with 'manipulation'and 'regimentation'),but in a long-awaited superstar?Is it politically almost no breathingspace, no time to switch the process, these manufacturersof a 'better provocativein playingwith the immediacies off, no diversion of interest.Claustrophobic life' can exclude many vital needs for the of the realpolitik - 'terrorists' in Kashmir in effect. the projection of happiness in the transformationof society, for example. the andbomb blasts in Bombay'?Does it feature film is 'jabardasti'.forced on us, whether need to respect women outside patriarchal a bandit queen? Has it advertised a new we like itor not, a manifestationof aggressive norms,ortheneed foroppressed communities titillatingdance numberonthe lines of 'choli hospitality ratherthan generosity of spirit. to develop alliances across differences ke peeche kya hai'? Does it explore some It is the purpose of this essay to question without the 'enlightened' patronageof the new-wave cinematography'?The answer to the constructionof happiness in Barjatya's ruling class. The only 'needs' addressedin all these questions is an incredulous 'no'. film, which almost assumes a utopic the world-of entertainmentare those which 'Hum Aapke Hai Koun' (HAHK) must be dimension. Keeping in mind that"arealised capitalism acknowledges and promises to one of the most banalsuperhits in the history utopiacanbeanothername forterror" (Nandy meet, so that in the final analysis, of Indiancitiema. Its audacity-liesin the fact 1987:1], I am alerted to the specific "entertainment provides alternatives to that it totally dispenses with a plot and all difficulties in analysing 'utopia' within the capitalism which will be provided by the 'masala'associated with sex andviolence. frameworkof whatwould seem like a totally capitalism." It is an emphatically clean film, a family innocuous, harmless entertainment.'Why Dyer attempts to counter this 'one- entertainmentparexcellence.celebrating one takeit so seriously?' is aquestionthat almost dimensional situation' by emphas-isingthe supremelyhuman evenlt - 'shaadi', with all any analys-isof HAHK would seem to be "contradictory nature of entertainment the conventions, rituals, and merriment up against from the very starn.It is almost forms", which are to be found in tlih surroundingit. With the exceptionI of one as if the film is immuneto being readagainist dis junction between narrativeand musical breakin the narrative,resulting from a death the grainof theexpectations, stock reactions, numbers, representational and noIn- in the family, which ironically contributes publicity and hype surroundingit. Indeed, representational' signs (colour, texture. to the insistently celebratory drive of the I am only too aware that my emphasis on movement,rhythm). T'omy mind, what Dyer film - we shallexamine its implicationslater certain details in the film can easily be as.sumesas 'contradictory',which he never in the essay - HAHK could be described dismissed on grounds of overstatement or defines, is more often than not a form of accurately (and not just with the hype of nit-picking. Nonetheless, at the risk of elaboration or substitution by whichi a advertising) as a non-stop roller-coasterof appearing elitist in countering cultural dominant set of signs in a particular laughter.food, songs andgames, functioning populism, or more specifically. a populism representationgets reiteratedin seemingly within the perfunctory framework of that does not question its own premises, I differentways. Thie'contradictionls'. if any, romance. would claim thatwhileentertainmentcanbe are cosmeticised. What appears to be a I say 'perfunctory' because romance is. enjoyed as entertainment.this does notmean subversionis actuallya meanosof reaffirming almost the pretext for sustaining the that its apparent 'autonomy' and aura of the underlying norms of a narrative. If dominance of fun in the film.' So fervent 'innocence' are entirely free from the Hollywood musicals (whiclh are the focus is Baljatya's commitmenttoproviding 'pure' exigencies of history and captial that it of Dyer's investigation)orcommercial Hindu

ctonomicand Political Weekly April 15, 1995 801

This content downloaded from 140.233.70.45 on Wed, 14 Jan 2015 09:57:20 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions films could contradictthe premises of their decisive end. almost flaunting its success is given the illusion that these commodities productionthrough oppositional signs, which like a signature.2One technical innovation are eminently available, suclh is their couldradically interrogate the content of the thathas contributedviscerally to the projec- abundance. overall construction.then we could begin to tionof B ar atya's successis theunprecedented speakof theirrepresentations of 'utopia' in use in cinemahalls of sparklinglights rotating WEALTH AND FAMILY a more liberatory context. Unfortunately, around the screen during the hit songs and Wealth is a 'given' in a pre-ordained whatexists in the form of 'utopia' is far less the 'happyend'. These liglhts,reminiscent of con(dition which exists without a hint of reflexive, and indeed, as I hope to elaborate the decorative borders surrounding film struggle, despite fleeting references to the in my discussion of HAHK, almost hoardings. further intensify the two- lhumblebeginnings of the'boys' surrogate frighteningly hermetic in construction. dimensional frame of Barjatya'sspectacle. father, Kakaji (Alok Nath) and Anupam enhacingthe materialityof its images, which Kher's relatively modest profession as a FEmSHISEDREPRESENTATION almost hit us in the face with the calculated professor. These references are totally Inits categoricalrejectionof aconventional immediacy of their impact. marginalised in favour of a portraitureof a story-line,HAHK would seem toexemplify Among the objects fetishised in the film, rich and happy family. Here all the relatives what has been described in film studies as itisfood thatismostalluringlyforegrounded, are nice, the brothers and sisters love each 'fetishised representation', which permits textualised, and texturalised with a power other, with Prem going to the extent of only an 'attenuated narrative' to repeat that I have not witnessed in any form of having a sign 'I love my family' paintedon ceaseless 'scenarios of desire' [Ellis advertising. Indeed, BariJatya's film is his jeep. There are no illegitimate or 1992:160-61]. Abolishing the distance gastronomicallylavissh and loaded with signs. di.shonoured or discarded siblings from between the spectator and the image, the On the one hand, there i.s the 'shaadi ka anothergeneration hovering in the shadows. 'fetishised repre.sentation'focuses, indeed. khana', topped with generous supplies of All is legitimate. .seedha-saadha'. And lingers and luxuriates. on the materialityof mithai, kulfi, cold drinks and paan. But it therefore the only option available is to objects, which are substitutes for desire, is the everday gharka khana' thatis almost aspireto the seeming bliss of this supremely more often than not concentrated in the overwhelming in its omnipresence,ranging happyfamily, orshould we say. anextended bodies and faces of the performers from kachori, samosa, halwa. namkecn, hindufamily whose membersare frequently themselves. At their most extreme, such achar, to a seemingly limitless supply of idenitifiedl not by name but by the genieric representations exploit the erotics of vegetables and fruits, primarilyslhinling red categories of mamaji.kakaji. bhatija,jethani, performance.'explicitly posed forthe viewer apples, which are only too visible on the devar. sali, jijaji. Direct blood-ties are far (sometimesinvolving the performerlooking dining tables and in the interiorsof kitchlens. less important than cultural bonds and directly at the audience)'. the primarysites of numerousscenes. Most affinities. so that a kakaji or clhachi can This is precisely what happens in the conspicuous of all details are the rounds of become a surrogate father and mother openingshots of HAHK as thecredits unfold chai which are served througlhoutthe film respectively.In thisalffirmatively harmoniious to reveal the charismatic faces of Salman at the oddest moments. constitutitng a world, there is no possibility of a vicaiious Khanand Madhuri Dixit. gigantic close-ups leitmotif in the narrative. protestthlrough the presenceof a malcontent in alternateframes which almost fill an entire A lot of humourin the film is specifically or a party-pooper0 or- some self-righteous half of the screen. The stars appear to be food-cenJtr-ed,involving the amateurculinary soul questioning the origins of this'wealth. singing to each other even as they look out skills of the hride's father(Anupam Kher); Thereis no dissent whatsoeverbecause there directly-atus in the audience,almost inviting the substitutionof saltfor sugarin themaking is no need for it. Don't worry. be happy' us to enter the seduction of their world of halwa: the concealment of papaadunder would alhnost be a radical slogan in this ('chehra mera pad lo kabhi'. as Madhuri a ssheetas part of weddinig humour. Even world where hiappiaessis the essentialised Dixit invites us to read her face). The very Tuffy the cdog (surely the major attraction conditionioJ life. repetition of the words, 'bechain hai meri of the film) drinks anientire Thums Up with Other signs of wealtlh in the film are nazar/haipyar ka kaisa asar'.../hum aapke a straw. At a more playful level, chocolates displayed thr-oughthe extravagantsupply of hainkoun',lulls us into acceptingthe inanity play a vital role in the romancing of the expenisive toys that emerge miraculously of non sequiturs, lines that go nowhere and younger couple, Prem (Salman Khan) and once the birthof Pooja's child is imminent. centre coyly around themselves. This Nissha(Madhuri Dixit), who arethe younger Barijatyapacks his frames with an almost circuitous rhetoric is amplified in the siblings of the married couple. Rajesh obscene variety of cartoons. cutouts,plastic repetitionof the shots, slow, langorous. and (Mohnish Behl) and Pooja (Renuka animals, train sets, and balloons, around dddly momentous, which provide a visual Shahane). Counterpointingthe formalities whiclh the adults celebrate their 'second clue as to what lies in store for us in the film. of marriage, the younger couple tease and childhlood'. More sign.s of familial wealth as the story is sidelined for an endless flirt with each other throughout the film. are casually evident in homely games of elaborationof desire. finally coming together over a home-made billiards, swimming pools. and at least two The 'repetitive' motif of HAHK is meal, the nutrition contributing to the displays of fireworks. the kind that rich perpetuatedin the idiom of romance that it ritualisation of their romance. families vie with each other in. in order to posits andpostpones. In this regard,the very In short, food becomes the most literal, prove their social status. And finally, there title 'Hum Aapke Hain Koun' could be yet reasonant sign in Barjatya's world of are exchanges of 'real' money as partof the regardedas a tease. Whilc appearing to be wealth and health, family and tradition. It gifts andjests in the wedding, including the a question, it is implicitly rhetorical, is there to be consumed, its surfaces mandatoty offering of money to the hijras, neutralised of inflection and gender. No seemingly touched up with vivid colours as whodemand theirduefrom the child's father wonderthen thatit is merely echoed by the in the icoIns of f(txd advertisements. At times. (on his return from abroad, where he has. younglovers when they voice the line, never the brand names of particular articles are successfully finalised a deal on a car factoiy answered.When itmakes its finalappearance barely concealed, so that we can dwell on with foreign collaboration). in the closing shot of the film, it is in the a Cadbury 5-Star bar or a bottle of Pepsi. Economically. this is a film that is form of a bold caption followed by an In the process, Barjatya naturalises the obviously in tune with the liberalisationof exclamation mark. We are expected to be iconicity of food itemvs,which (in reality) ourtimes. while being thoroughlygrounded regaled by it, not to que,stionthe inanity of could .scarcelybe afforded brythe million.s in the .signsof a homogeni.sed.upper-clas.c, its inscription, as it brings the film to a of people watching hiscfilm. Andlyet one upper-ca.stehindu co nstituency. For all the

802 Economic and Political Weckly April 15. 1995

This content downloaded from 140.233.70.45 on Wed, 14 Jan 2015 09:57:20 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions displayof wealth,there is no overt flashines.s larger beneficent structure in which he is The second interruption in the film in a nouveau-iicheor blatantly'westernised' accommodatedhospitably.4 followiig Lalloo's telegram is more olting mode. Thecultural codesremain indigenous: A more problematic constructioniof the in.sofarasitresults in ahreakinthenian-ative - no booze, no non-veg, no cigarettes (only 'other' is conicealedin the characterisation Pooj;ainexplicably falls down the stairs,and MadhuriDixit mimes smoking a cigarette of Lalloo. the genial servant. who is atmost shortly after. dies in hospital. For ne, this with a pencil, revealing her muclh-valorised a member of the family. Indeed, so close is death (which lasts barely three minutes. and deceptive aura of 'liberation'). the camaraderiebetweeni Lalloo and( Prem following two-and-a-half hours of almost If the Hindu inscriptions of wealth in the that their class signs are almost entirely unmitigatedfun) comes as a great.source of film are naturalised within the framework eradicated.The servantand his young master 'tragicrelief' because it has the potentialto of the wedding, they are more self- dance and play cricket together, apartfrom dismanatlethe construction of happiness in consciously insertedin the preceding scene plottingallkind.s ofromantic intrigues against the film. But barely ten minutes after Pooja whereRajesl andPooja meet in the environs Nishla.Atno pointin the film arewe presented falls, anotherround ofteaemerges, initiating of a hindu dharamshalaadjoining the Ram with any signs of Lalloo's background in a new cycle of reasSurance.Following the Tengritemple. (This site. incidentally,is one the village, his sick bhouji, for instance. tea and doctorsahib's recommendationthat of the very few locations that is specifically remains an absence. Nor do we witness any the pining Rajesh should manryagain (it is named in the entire film, which oscillates representativeof the 'working class' or the only natural), the old Hindi film formulae betweentwo householdswhos,e geographical 'destitute', who have almost always been surfacewith youngeribrotherPrem sacrificing specificities are left completely nebulous. inscribed in the master narrativesof Hindi his love for Nisha, who imaginiesthat she 'North Indian' would be the most cinema,even if theirmodes of representation is martying Prem only to confronit- horror approximate definition of the cultural have been contrived, melodramatic and of hoirors. while 'mehindi'is being put on geography in the film.) In the tradition of exploitative.In thisregard, we arecompelled herhands - thatthe invitationcardi mentions utopic representations, which posit a to recall the evocations of the 'common anotlherbiidegroom. Thnroughsome process 'temporal and spatial elsewhere', the Ram man' and the 'toiling masses' in the of divine intervention in which Tuffy the Tengri temple is represented in a totally masterworksof Mehboob, Raj Kapoorand dog plays a vital role, the film draws to an synthetic space, with no trace of the Manmohan Desai. In contrast, Sooraj inevitable deniouementas the true lover.s surroundinglandscape, neighbourhood, or Barjatya solves the problem of subaltern come together, precipitating yet another community. Whatever exists is within the representationby simply excluding the poor 'shaadi'.with eveirybodywhirling in circles, framework of the temple. whicIl becomes from the canvas of his film. handin hand,biinging theround of merriment the mediating sign by which Pooja reveals All whcoexist antdarc worth addressinig fullcir-cle. Death, therefore, merely reinforces her grace and devotionito Rajeslhthrouglh are subsumedlin the world of 'richIndianis'. the utopia of another wedding in the total her painting of the temple itself.' Hindu the kind whom Manmohan Singh wouldl closure of a 'happy end'. icons, emblems, and colours arc visible in love to believe as representativeof the Indiani almost every frame of this hermetic space, population at large. Lalloo is merely an CONSUMPTION AS SPECrIACLC which is charged with sanictity. Even the extension of the 'rich', upwardly mobile. It is a dauntingfact to realise thaitmillionis 'diyas' that float in the waters around the learning-to-speak-English, compering of people in India are watcliing this 'end temple merge simultaneously for onie split- cricketmatches.Atone point.heieven recites with a profoundsuspension of disbelief. or second to form a swastika. Such are the a few lines extolling the virtues of Pandit so it would seem from the raptattention and subliminalsigns of hindu religiosity which Nehru. Thleparody of his representationis ardour with which the film is being seen. become increasingly emphatic as the film not entirely innocent, as can be glimpsed In the absence of audience surveys, one may proceeds, not least when Pooja is presented from the seemingly gratuitous,yet telling, notbe able to gauge definitivelywhatexactly with a copy of the RKamawvantn,over which frontalshotof L,allooholding a book entitled is being absorbed and retained, but if the her brother-in-lawsolemnly takes an oath USSR upside down. The joke is as much box-office remains the ultimatecriterioni of swearing allegiance to his bhabhi. on a defunct and redundantsocialist system assessing not just the populaiity but the as on Lalloo himself,who is merelya satellite powerof commer-cialcinem a. thenthe world POLITICSOF INCLUSION of the capitalist ideology that is assumed as represented in HAHK would appear to be All of these signs can be defended on an unquestionied norm of progress and eminently desirable. The ingredientsof its grounds of verisimilitude. The contexts of benevolence in the film. success need to be taken seriously and not a temple and a 'shaadi'. after all, have to Anidyet, there is a seeming twist in the just dismissed as some kind of freak or be hindu. But what needs to be emphasised representationof Lalloo when the crass and manipulatedpheniomenon. Rather. we should is notjust thepredominance and incremental execrable Bindu (who is the only quasi- tLiyto understand its mass appeal through power of the hindu signs, but more subtly, villainous figure in the family) refers to him what Han Magnus Enzensberger has the way in which they have been conflated categoricallyas a 'naukar'. This is in response identified as "the elemental power of deep with the constructionof an 'Indian'identity. to the telegramthathas arrived from Lalloo's social needs" [Dyer 1993: 277]. Though we Almostmandatorily.the 'othercommunity' home announcing his bhouji's illness, and may not necessaiily agree thatthese 'needs' is inscribedin this constructionthrough the the subsequentgenerosity of Pooja in giving have "physiological roots which can no most blatant use of comic tokenism in the him some money. Bindu interprets the longer be suppressed", Enzensberger is form of a fat muslim doctor who, of course, telegram as a 'bahana',a hoax which pains deeply intuitive, I believe, in locating these has to recite 'shairi' almost as soon as he Lalloo gr6atly.4The moment is undeniably 'needs' within the context of "consumption makes his entrance. At one level, the flair affecting because it is the first -sign of a as spectacle", which contains "thepromise in the performanceis highly enjoyable. but 'human emotion' that interruptsthe heady thatwant will disappear",even when "there one should not forget that it is grounded in momentum of joy in the film. But can be no question of a real fulfilment of the stereotypes of representingminorities, significantly, it shifts the attention away this promise". While acknowledging the where the muslim becomes a nice person from Lalloo to Pooja. who inspires him to deception. brutality and obscenity of the especiallywlhen he reaffirmsthe fundamental receive the blessingsof good. In her 'vishvas' media, Enzen.sbergernonetheles.s qualifies goodne.ssof his hindu brethren.His cultural that all will be well, she embodie.san aura that, "con.sumption as spectacle is, in difference is merely superficial. anobJect of of humanity that epitomises the essential parody form, the anticipation of a utopian humour, but fundamentally, he is part of a goodness of god-fearing capitali.sts. .situation".

Economic and Political Weekly April 15, 1995 803

This content downloaded from 140.233.70.45 on Wed, 14 Jan 2015 09:57:20 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Whatmakes the utopianrepresentation of that seems to be pervadinig our society as a go-betweeni. In HAHK, romance is ain HAH Kdisturbing is the intensity witlh whicI thiroughl a cr-aze for niovelties and elaborate imotif supjorting ai much more the spectacle is offered to be consumed, commodities.Sooraj Barjatya is alsodrawinig emphaticcelehratioin of capitaland community, hut the 'love story' is subsumed (as discussed withoutthe mediationof a sustainedparody. on veiy real needs- for 'security' and in imayessay) within a larger propagation of If the protagoniistsof the film could have 'community'. which are being eroded 'utopia'. been allowed by their dlirectorto parody systematically by the state. In this regard. 2 At the risk of stressing the insiginificant,it theirdesires. there would have been greater the most problematic component in hiis should he pointed out that the word *Koun' possibilities of questioning the premises of projection of utopia is an effervescent in the title is flashed anidthen erased, so that the film. But what appears to be 'parody' constr-uctionof 'th community'as providing thefinal title in the last itnageof the film reads: 'fHumAapke Hain...!' This would seem to be invariably borders on 'burlesque' - most a model as it were for a well-ordered, even imoreof a declarationthan the title of the significantly, the dramatisation of the hit wholesome. civilised Indianilife. It would filml. song 'didi tera devar deewana'. where a be an exaggeration, perhaps. to claim that 3 Renuka Shahainecould be the first television wcomaincross-dres-ses as a man, Salman HAHK is about the Hindu Right. but it is: personality to be feaituredprominently in a Khan' s double. a surTogate brother-in-law, definitely a film that would niot hlave beeni Hindi filim superhit. By casting her as Pooja, Blarjatyais obviously playing oni the persona while wooinig a 'pregniant' Madhuri Dixit. possible withouta deep internalisation ot the for which she Is best kntownthroughout India, Itis signiificantthat while appearingto subvert HincduRight in popular anidmass culture. as the anchorwoman.the second-in-comiimanid the normsol heterosexualromantic love. the What can be seen against the grain of' the on SiddharthKak'sgrosstv overrated Suralbhi'. song ultimatelyvindicates patriarclhal control film. thlouglh the seeming idiocy of its In the role of Pooja.lShahaane merely extends in determining gender and desire, with nalTativc.is the ease with which the market hersecotnd-iti-cominiandstatus as thechianrmitig Salman Klhanchasing away hiissurrogate, has been embr-acedwithin amatrixof upper- wife of Rajesh. comubinintga mioderit.level- headed while appearinigin the final moments of the cheerful outlook on life (putictuated class. 'traditional', hindu cultural valuLes wVithsemlisi-auto matic grits) along withadutiful song dressed in a skimpy, silken slip as a with aniappropriate dose of religiosity to subservience as the bahu' in at Hindu pregnantmale'. Now tiis can be dismissed keep 'thefamily' lappy, andlvery di.screetly - houselhold. In a different register, Pooja's as a trivial ,sign. but what it illuminates without makinigan issue of it - to keep the banteringtone in her playtul exchanges with throughits triviality is the reaffirmationof others out. Of course, if they wisshto eniter Prem, is startlingly similar to the rehearsed codes and cultural norms that only appear this matrix. they will always be welcomed reparteethat ReniukaShahanie has adoptedin her exchiange.s with Siddharth Kak. In the to be parodied. witlh a cup of tea and(iabsoirbed. combinationiof traditioni and tnodemity', Tellingly.there is no suchplayful treatment 'Claustiophobic', 'homogenised'. seemling ionnality' nd professionialismi, in exposing the econlomy that supports the monocultural . 'totalising' are some of the nlotto miielitionthe consutmerismthat Surabhi' represenitationof wealtlhandl happiness in sigiis ot' a new naiTative that seemis to be propaigaitesthrough its culturalquiz. there are the film. Thnerepresentation of capital is emerging tlhroughthe negation of earlier so;mevery tantalisinig,yet tellittg sigtis of the growi II nexus betweeti 'televisioit' and 'film' extravagantanid loaded with fun, but at no film narratives.wlhich for all theirmoralistic cultures in India. This will definitely be a point in the film is its 'illusion' called into hypociisies anidat'l'iliations to earlie:rmodes subject worth analysing at a later stage. question. The econiomic foundations of of capital.weie moreexpanisive. variegated. 4 Hypotheticailly.tor the sake ot argument. it Barjatya's utopiain Bollywood remainintact. hiistrioniic,anid diverse in tlheii'modes of would1be almost iiiipossible to imaigineHAHK If thefilm hassurpassed all box-office records representation.All HAHKcan do is to invoke coittextualised in a predominanttlymuslim in the history of Indian cinema, it is the master nalTativesof Mughal-E-Azam, social background.Nor is it enitirelyplausible thit tle lovers could be divided' in the classic substantiallyrelated to the narrativein wlhich Slholayand Bobby thlouglha game, where Indian foninula through warriiig families or contemporaiycapitalism has heen inscribed the inner circle of 'the family' sits around distitict comiiiuniities.'nhis is not to assume wt4hout any significant inflection or and passes a cushion to bursts of old Hindi that these optiotis would be free of their own contradiction whatsoever. The presiding film songs. Nostalgia is letishisecl through politics, but the poiit is that HAHIKobliterates deityof thefilm (to whom even LordKrishina quotations. but the lessons of the past are the possibility of such optiotis through the andSri Ramawould seem to be agents rather not re-invented.Inisteaid. they are submitted strong,hinidu majoritarian thrust of its iiarrative. 5 In a later scene, followitig Pooja's death, than rivals) is wealth. In this context. the to the horseplayof self-exhibition and then Lalloo is indirectlypitted against Bindu, wheit deepest 'social need' that is at once targeted glibly passed over for the cultivated she brazenlysuggests thatRajesh should marry andfetishised in the film is wlhatmoney can superficialities of the present. her niece, Sweety, on condition that Pooja's buy - thisincludes a 'happy'family, romanice. It is, indeed, a sad sign of our times that child can be brought up by an ayah. As the food, andan endless rounidof fun andgames. we should be celebrating the century of men in the family echo Lalloo's deep sense of Bindu flies into a It would seem to me that the surrenderto cinema in India with a shock, rage which is superhit so vacuous ternminatedonily when her seemingly imild Barjatya'sutopia cannot be separatedfrom as 'Hum Aapke Hain Koun...!' - a film husband, 'Mamaji', slaps her for her flagrant the infiltration of capital in our cultural devoid of any illusion worthyof themassive insensitivity to a mother's love ('ma ki space, which provides the overwhelming suffering andpoverty of millions of people, mamta'). In the process, Bindu's aberratit majority of millions of people with veiy who are at once the primary patrons and behaviour reinforces the essentially civilised little scope for negotiation,thereby ensuring victims of its vision. The 'innocuous', codes of family life upheld in the film. Anid significantly, when Bitidu makes her finil their total exclusion from the benefits of however, is what appears to be the idiom appearanceass a reformed, pregnantwife, her capitalism while subjecting them with most deeply related to the 'banalityof evil' vamp-like behaviouris obliteratedthrough an renewed intensities to its consumerist lure. in our times. apparent chainge of consciousness. So, Though Barjatya does not narrativise the ultimately, even Bindu is part of Sooraj global dimensions of this scenario (beyond Notes Barjatya's 'happy etid'. the nebulous foreign connections in an [I would liketo thank Gagan Makarforhis criti- References unnamedcountry which enable Rajesh and cal contributions to the research of this essay.] I)er, Richard 'Entertainmentand Prem to build their factoty). he succeeds in 1 In this respect,HAHK is significantly different (1993): Utcopia' in SimioniDuring (ed), TimeCultural Sludies domesticating (and thereby, rhapsodising) from Sooraj Barjatya'searliersupethit 'Maine Pyar Kiya', where romance is foregrounded Readler.Routledge. l ondoni. the 'good life' provided by unquestioned I llis,Johni (1 992): Th1eSNexual S'ubject. Routledge, resources of money. and built into the structure of the film, concentrating on two young lovers divided London and New York. But thi.sis not all. Apartfrom tuning vely thrugh class and patriarchalstrictures, who .Nandy,Ashis (19')87):Traditio,rr, Tyrannty andl ingeniously into)the infantali.sationof desire eventuallycome togetherwithapigeon serving UJtopiass,Oxford University P'ress, New Delhi.

804 Economic and Political Weekly April 15. 1995

This content downloaded from 140.233.70.45 on Wed, 14 Jan 2015 09:57:20 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions